This invention relates to loose-leaf binders and analogous products such as loose-leaf personal organizers, loose-leaf flip charts, loose-leaf writing pads and loose-leaf photo albums.
Binders generally are comprised of two high-level assemblies, a xe2x80x9cskeletonxe2x80x9d and cover. The skeleton, as used herein, refers to the chassis of the binder, including the rings, spine and possible actuators, but excluding the cover. The spine, as used herein, refers to the elongated portion of the skeleton on which the rings are mounted; the spine excludes the rings, any transversely protruding elements disposed at the longitudinal ends of the skeleton such as actuation levers or proximate to the attachment points of rings such as springs wrapped around ring bases, and transversely protruding elements which are not fixed to rotate with the elongated portion such as a cover-attachment fastener wrapped about and rotatable about the elongated portion.
One object of loose-leaf binders, which is related to both the skeleton and the cover, is minimization of the xe2x80x9cfootprintxe2x80x9d of the binder. The footprint of a binder is the area that is covered by any part of the binder when the binder is placed upon a generally flat surface. Minimizing a binder""s footprint during use efficiently utilizes desk, table, or lap space.
A substitute product, the spiral notebook, specifically addresses this object by letting users flip the front cover and forward pages perfectly flat beneath the back cover and latter pages. However, spiral notebooks do not permit the easy addition or removal of pages.
Conventional loose-leaf binders have a very large footprint because, during use, the front cover is open 180 degrees relative to the back cover. This large footprint causes these binders to be cumbersome during use. Furthermore, if the front cover and forward loose-leaves are flipped behind the back cover and latter loose-leaves of a conventional binder, the forward and latter loose-leaves do not lie flat against the front and back covers, respectively. Large stress is exerted on some loose-leaves causing them to tear out of the binder and the airfoil shape of the stack of forward loose-leaves, front cover, back cover, and latter loose-leaves does not provide a flat writing surface. Furthermore in this case, writing on the topmost loose-leaf is difficult as the stack of loose-leaves bends and springs back under the shifting weight of a writing hand and wrist.
In the prior art, there have been attempts to minimize the footprints of loose-leaf binders during use while eliminating the problems mentioned above for conventional binders. However, each of these attempts has had some failing including: (1) sacrifice of a desired feature, (2) only partial achievement of this functionality, and (3) addition of undesirable characteristics.
The failings of known loose-leaf binders to minimize binder footprints are principally the result of (1) the large transverse cross-section dimensions of spines of known skeletons, (2) the methods employed to attach covers to skeletons, and (3) the design of the covers.
The first main cause of these failings, the large transverse cross-section dimensions of loose-leaf binder skeleton spines, has generally resulted from a common objective of skeletons, the ability to simultaneously open and close all rings of a skeleton via a simple actuation mechanism. SOCRA, which is used herein to describe these skeletons, is an acronym for Simultaneously Openable/Closeable Rings Actuation.
Conventional loose-leaf binders have SOCRA skeletons with spines having transverse cross-sections with major and minor dimensions wherein the large major dimension is built into the perimeter of the rings whereas the minor dimension is substantially radial to the center of the rings. Binder skeleton spines have traditionally had a transverse cross-section with a ratio of major to minor dimensions greater than two.
Conventional loose-leaf binders have a front cover attached to a middle cover which in turn is attached to a back cover. The SOCRA skeleton is rigidly fixed to the middle cover or back cover via rivets.
Exemplary dimensions of conventional loose-leaf binder covers in the market are as follows:
Typical dimensions of conventional loose-leaf binder skeletons in the market are as follows:
A ring outer diameter differs from its corresponding ring inner diameter by two ring prong thicknesses. Skeleton spine width is the major transverse cross-section dimension of a binder skeleton spine. The widths of skeleton spines are affected and constrained by the SOCRA mechanism employed and ring prong thickness. Note that as ring size increases, prong thickness increases to handle the stronger forces acting on the rings. Because ring prongs are commonly riveted into plates in conventional skeletons, as ring prongs increase in thickness, the skeleton spine width also must increase to secure the thicker prongs. The smallest conventional binders in the market which are small pocket binders have skeleton spine widths that are still 10 mm thick. Because of the thinness of cover segments and thickness of SOCRA skeleton spines in the prior art, the prior art generally teaches away from embedding of a SOCRA skeleton spine in a binder cover.
The large transverse cross-section of known SOCRA skeleton designs has led to the orientation of the transverse cross-section such that the major dimension is substantially radial to the center of the rings in an attempt to minimize the binder footprint. However, this orientation has made attachment to the cover more difficult which in turn has led to the use of loose-leaf front and back covers with no middle cover disposed therebetween. Such configuration exposes the rings and the ends of the loose-leaves leaving both less protected and makes the binder cumbersome to handle and less attractive. In such a known binder, the skeleton creates an awkward lump, thwarting the object of a flat writing surface, when positioned within a stack of loose-leaves or when positioned between the front cover and back cover after the front cover is flipped around against the back cover. U.S. Pat. No. 3,190,293 to Schneider, U.S. Pat. No. 4,904,103 to Im and U.S. Pat. No. 2,331,461 to Dawson are examples of such known binders.
Alternatively, to minimize binder footprints, some loose-leaf binders have independently-openable rings. In some of these loose-leaf binders, the back cover pivots about the thin skeleton spine and the front cover hangs loose-leaf on the rings, but there is no middle cover joining the front cover to the back cover. These designs make insertion and removal of loose-leaves tedious. Also, the exposed rings are unattractive and the loose-leaves are less protected. U.S. Pat. No. 659,860 to Schild and U.S. Pat. No. 2,268,431 to Slonneger are examples of such binders.
Yet another problem with known attempts to build a minimal-footprint binder are inadequate ring shapes having varying loose-leaf capacity when these binders are open 360 degrees versus when they are closed. This variation in capacity results from inclusion of the skeleton among the loose-leaves in one position but not in the other. U.S. Pat. No. 4,904,103 to Im is an example of such a binder.
Accordingly, this invention provides an improved binder that satisfies the object of providing a binder with a minimal footprint during operation while obviating the disadvantages of the prior art. The invention includes improvements to the binder skeleton, cover and attachment of the skeleton to the cover.
To minimize the binder footprint, the various embodiments of the invention described below contain at least one of the following elements as features:
(1) Skeleton with a minimal LSCPL (defined below).
(2) SOCRA skeleton.
(3) Cover designs that allow the front cover and back cover to fold in flat formations when open 360 degrees while simultaneously allowing the rings to rotate around an edge of the flatly-folded cover.
(4) Spine of skeleton axially disposed relative to rotation of rings and oppositely rotating back cover when the binder is open 360 degrees.
(5) Spine of skeleton embedded or partially embedded in cover in design and/or during operation of binder.
(6) Middle cover joining front cover to back cover.
(7) Attachment of the middle cover to back cover so that the covers do not interfere with rotation of the rings when the binder is opened 360 degrees.
(8) Slots or holes to eliminate interference of cover with skeleton rings as skeleton rings rotate through plane of back cover.
(9) Longest ring dimension is much larger than the LSCPL (defined below).
(10) Attachment of skeleton to cover in a way that allows the front cover to lie flat on the back cover while the binder is open 360 degrees.
(11) Rings hidden (not exposed) when binder is closed.
(12) Writing-support pads (described below).
(13) Stable, incremental rotation of rings about an edge of the flatly-folded cover without a strong bias to particular positions.
(14) Ring shapes with particular orientations to skeleton and cover to optimize or stabilize binder capacity.
The preferred embodiments have a spine. LSCPL is an acronym for the Longest Spine Cross-section Perimeter Line segment and refers to the longest line segment connecting two points on the perimeter of the transverse cross-section of the skeleton spine. For example, for a skeleton spine having a circular cross-section, the LSCPL is the circle""s diameter; for an ellipse, the LSCPL is the major axis; for a square or rectangle, the LSCPL is a diagonal; for a triangle, the LSCPL is the longest side of the triangle.
The LSCPL dimension is important. When the binder cover is open 360 degrees, the binder cover is turned inside out such that at least a portion of the interior surfaces of the front and back covers face in opposite directions and the skeleton spine as well as a portion of the cover may be sandwiched between forward and latter loose-leaves. Preferably, the cover folds flat when open 360 degrees. The rings must be able to rotate while the cover is open 360 degrees. In the preferred embodiments, rotation of the rings necessitates that the spine rotate. If the LSCPL dimension is less than or equal to the thickness of the front and back covers, the spine can lie completely between the interior surface planes of the front and back cover throughout the complete range of the spine""s rotation; in this case, the spine can remain flush with the front and back cover so that any potential lump caused by the spine while it is sandwiched between forward and latter loose-leaves is minimized or prevented so as to present a flatter top loose-leaf surface. Furthermore, the LSCPL dimension influences the desired thickness of a cover segment having a tabular void or conduit in which the spine is rotatably disposed as a pivot of cover rotation; as the cover segment rotates about the spine, the conduit containing the spine must accommodate the LSCPL dimension.
Various features of each preferred embodiment cooperate to enable its loose-leaves above and below the back cover to lie flat and parallel when the cover is open 360 degrees whether none, one, many, or all of the loose-leaves are flipped below the back cover.
In the preferred embodiments, a SOCRA skeleton is rotatably disposed in a cover such that (1) the spine is a pivot about which the cover can rotate and (2) the spine is axially disposed relative to opposite rotations of the cover and rings.
Several embodiments of skeletons for use with the binder are disclosed for minimizing the LSCPL. For example, in one embodiment of a skeleton, the rings are attached via a space-saving weld or braze versus the space-demanding riveting of conventional binders.
Embedment of a skeleton in a cover segment without the segment becoming awkwardly thick and unattractive becomes feasible beginning with skeletons having LSCPL values of about 7-9 mm. Most preferably, the LSCPL of the skeleton is less than or equal 5 mm.
Preferably, the binder has a SOCRA skeleton with a synchronized switching element or actuator to open or close its rings simultaneously. The preferred synchronized switching element has a first connective element which connects to one set of ring segments and a second connective element which connects to a corresponding and opposing second set of ring segments. The synchronized switching element has a mechanism to enable the first connective element to move in relation to the second connective element so as to open or close the first ring segments relative to the second ring segments.
Means for attaching the front, middle and back cover segments are also disclosed.
Accordingly, several objects or advantages of my invention contained in various embodiments described below are:
(a) to provide a binder which can minimize its footprint during use by flipping the front cover and any number of forward loose-leaves flatly beneath the back cover and latter loose-leaves and which lacks the limitations and failings of past attempts cited;
(b) to provide a binder which is reversible, so that either side may be used with equal advantages, the reversal being accomplished by opening the binder 360 degrees and then positioning it to access either the back of the exposed forward loose-leaf page or front of the exposed latter page, whereby either or both sides of a page may be written upon;
(c) to provide a binder which always presents a flat writing surface including when the front cover is opened 180 or 360 degrees relative to the back cover, and the whole surface of the current loose-leaf page is flat and can be used from edge to edge and top to bottom;
(d) to provide a binder whose front and back covers and optional writing-support pads may take the place of a desk, offering good support to write upon if the pad is rested in a lap or held in the hand;
(e) to provide an attractive binder with rings hidden when closed;
(f) to provide a binder affording superior protection to loose-leaves via a surrounding cover;
(g) to provide a binder that is easy to handle, conveniently packs in brief cases and book bags and stacks or stands well on a bookshelf;
(h) to provide a binder which reduces tearing stress on its loose-leaf pages when they are flipped beneath the back cover and latter pages;
(i) to provide a thin binder when closed by embedding the skeleton spine in the cover;
(j) To provide a binder with releasably retaining rings to bind loose-leaf pages permitting easy addition or removal of loose-leaf pages as desired;
(k) to provide a binder with the ability to simultaneously open or close all of the binder""s rings by a skeleton mechanism to reduce the effort of adding or removing loose-leaf pages;
(l) to provide a binder with the smallest possible LSCPL skeleton value to eliminate or minimize any lump cause by the skeleton when the binder is open 360 degrees but where the skeleton fulfills its requirement to enable simultaneous opening and closing of all rings;
(m) to provide a binder with a skeleton which can accommodate various numbers and spacings of rings;
(n) to provide a binder with a skeleton that is spring urged to or can be locked in either of two stable states, an open position or closed position so its rings do not inadvertently open or close;
(o) to provide a skeleton with a ring shape that provides substantially constant capacity during operation when the skeleton may be rotated from its upright position; and
(p) to provide a binder that can be manufactured cheaply.
Further objects and advantages of my invention will become apparent from consideration of the drawings and ensuing description.